ARUN TANDON
RAJENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent
Hon’ble Arun Tandon, J.—Heard Sri Neeraj Sharma, Advocate on behalf of petitioner and learned Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents.
2. For the Excise Year 2002-03, a new policy was enforced and for the said purpose, U.P. Excise (Settlement of Licences for Retail Sale of Country Liquor) Rules, 2002 were notified vide notification dated 14th March, 2002. In accordance with this policy, an advertisement was published for settlement of the shop for retail sale of country liquor in District Etah. The petitioner submitted an application for grant of licence in respect of the shops situated at Nagla-Bari, Tehsil Sadar and Badaola, District Etah. The petitioner was selected for grant of licence in respect of aforesaid shops and he was accordingly intimated by respondent No. 4, namely, District Excise Officer, Etah.
3. In the relevant Excise year, because of the interim order passed by the Hon’ble High Court, in a bunch of writ petition, the settlement of the shop for retail sale of country liquor could not take place on 2nd April, 2002. It was only on 20th April, 2002 that the petitioner was called upon to complete the formality for the grant of licence. However, till such grant
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.